I'm pretty hardcore, trijicon primarily when it comes to glass but with what I've read so far it's worth a shot

Narcissism is the belief in nothing masquerading as tolerance of everything...Ayn Randwww.2AFight.com

The reticle can do things that no other scope can and thats the bottom line.
Trijicon has better glass but where all others lack is in reticle design and it is the engine of the scope if you will. No matter what quality the glass is you end up looking at a data book. Picture all the ranging,wind and lead marking missing from the ACSS.Then your back to a standard scope. Do you know how to range estimate using your Trijicon if the target is not facing you? What are your wind holds? How would range a moving or target of opportunity? I have studied sniper competitions and they are running around with papers in hand DOPE written on their hands and so on! There is a better way!This is the next generation of reticle designs. As you have been following the thread we test and test. If your in southern Cali come shoot it. Shooting a stationary target at a known distance is one thing any scope can do that, the magic is to do it to multiple targets at unknown distance in wind while they are moving.

Is there a 5.56 version and a .308 version or is it the same scope for both calibers?

Same scope
5.56 uses a different zero

There a lot of .223 loads that line up with the BDC l listed them on the display. As far as 5.56 it lines up really well when dialing in 1"-2" low at 100 yards depending on load and barrel length
I also posted 5.56 test results a few pages back.

This is at 600 yards using M193 and a 20" AR dialed in 1" low at 100 yards

Yeah I agree I've had to get really good and fast at math. I got the really good part down not so much the fast

Narcissism is the belief in nothing masquerading as tolerance of everything...Ayn Randwww.2AFight.com

Its not just math. There is no way you could memorize the bdc wind holds, ranging and leads in order to be able to dial it all in. Your left having to use mil holds on the reticle not to mention there is no way for you to range a moving target. In order for you to engage a target it would look like this!

Range to target unknown.

You would have to range it using known measurements like 18" shoulder to shoulder 5'10" for height or 36" for torso and so on.
It looks like this 36x27.778 divide by mils covering target equals range. Lol by the time you do that alone its too late!

So now you know the range lets say 600 yards
So lets say 14 moa well thats almost to revolutions if its tracking true.
Now your wind so lets say 7.5 mph
You would need to have it written down and dial that in as well. 30 seconds later your ready to shoot! Now if another target or threat were to present it self say 400 yards on your flank and prone you would have no way of hitting it because your dialed in at 600 yards with different wind.Trust me this thing is revolutionary and is light years beyond anything else. Most will not even understand just how dominate and superior the ACSS system is until they are faced with these shots. Shooting at paper at 100 yards is easy. Instant ranging leading with BDC and wind holds is rocket science laser edged on your reticle. Your not taking the shot the software or reticle is. As long as you shoot steady and level the ACSS will do its part.

Seriously, as soon as you have MOA turrets and MOA markers (say, every 2 MOA) you will sell more. I'd even pay a premium for that, especially if there was a version that had high-end glass to go with the reticle.

One thing to consider: You are making this reticle to make shooting and ranging easier and faster. A lot of beginning to mid-level shooters use MOA (they find the learning curve easier). They can probably benefit MORE than people who have been trained in mils.

Seriously, as soon as you have MOA turrets and MOA markers (say, every 2 MOA) you will sell more. I'd even pay a premium for that, especially if there was a version that had high-end glass to go with the reticle.

One thing to consider: You are making this reticle to make shooting and ranging easier and faster. A lot of beginning to mid-level shooters use MOA (they find the learning curve easier). They can probably benefit MORE than people who have been trained in mils.

Its not easier at all! Most shooters can't understand why they have a mil reticle with moa turrets! Mil turrets with a Mil reticle is as easy as shoot measure how many mils your off using the reticle and dial in exact measurement with mil turrets. Example shoot a round and measure how far its from the center using reticle so lets say 2 mils low, all you need to do now is dial in 2 mils up and your on. Not to mention less rotation of the turrets using moa your having to do multiple revolutions. Ballistic software can give out mil or moa BDC. With a mil reticle you can get exact BDC for each mil. Your better off learning to do it right then learning moa becoming more experienced and switching to mils.

I didn't say that it WAS easier in the end, I'm saying that they FIND it easier. If you don't have a military/LE trainer teaching it to you, it's a lot less psychologically intimidating to deal with "1 MOA = 1 inch," since most folks in the US can psychologically grasp what 1 inch is, but a mil is "some weird number involving math I don't want to think about." Is that rational? Probably not. Is that how a bunch of folks think? Absolutely. Do they spend money too? You better believe it.

Getting an exact BDC for each mil is the same as getting an exact BDC for each MOA or each hash mark ANYWHERE on a reticle. Nikon has software that does this online, for example. I'll give you that Mils are less rotations, and for combat/practical shooting, that's a plus.

Personally, if I was going to learn it all over again, I would probably learn mils. The problem is that I am now set in my ways, and don't have the time/energy to re-train. I barely get to shoot these days as it is. Have some pity on the likes of us, and spread the awesomeness of your reticle with the MOA crowd, please.

I didn't say that it WAS easier in the end, I'm saying that they FIND it easier. If you don't have a military/LE trainer teaching it to you, it's a lot less psychologically intimidating to deal with "1 MOA = 1 inch," since most folks in the US can psychologically grasp what 1 inch is, but a mil is "some weird number involving math I don't want to think about." Is that rational? Probably not. Is that how a bunch of folks think? Absolutely. Do they spend money too? You better believe it.

Getting an exact BDC for each mil is the same as getting an exact BDC for each MOA or each hash mark ANYWHERE on a reticle. Nikon has software that does this online, for example. I'll give you that Mils are less rotations, and for combat/practical shooting, that's a plus.

Personally, if I was going to learn it all over again, I would probably learn mils. The problem is that I am now set in my ways, and don't have the time/energy to re-train. I barely get to shoot these days as it is. Have some pity on the likes of us, and spread the awesomeness of your reticle with the MOA crowd, please.

Nikkon as a combat optic?. I understand what your saying we will put out a version with moa turrets at some point maybe next year sometime it will hit the market but as far as doing an MOA on the reticle well it ended up running into the BDC. As you know I have been testing and testing both .223 and .308. After establishing zero I have not touched the turrets and getting dead on hits 100-1000 yards! I come from a mixed martial art background and the philosophy is simple keep what works and disregard the rest. With that said I get it you guys want MOA. If that makes you buy it the so be it lol.

How many will be coming in with the first batch? I want to make sure I get one as my new bolt-action .308 is waiting to be shot and I am holding off for this scope to mount on her before I break her in.

Seems like all the companies are making a ballistic software to adjust the bdc on their reticules and visually show them where each mark is going to hit. Might be on to something for those who cant understand how to use mils just yet.

Nikkon as a combat optic LOL thanks I needed that. I understand what your saying we will put out a version with moa turrets at some point maybe next year sometime it will hit the market but as far as doing an MOA on the reticle well it ended up running into the BDC. As you know I have been testing and testing both .223 and .308. After establishing zero I have not touched the turrets and getting dead on hits 100-1000 yards! I come from a mixed martial art background and the philosophy is simple keep what works and disregard the rest. With that said I get it you guys want MOA. If that makes you buy it the so be it lol.

If it complicates the BDC, the it's probably not worth it. I can see that. I can certainly say that there is NO point in MOA turrets on a Mil reticle. ARGH...you are going to make me go out and learn Mils, aren't you? $#%$! How exactly does it "run into the BDC"? Do the lines end up overlapping or something?

As for Nikon being combat scopes? Hardly. It was just an example of ballistics software that can give you actual BDC on their reticle for a given weight/BC/Height over Bore/etc... I personally don't mind a Nikon for a .22, but they don't do anything in a FFP, and that's a deal breaker in a variable power scope for me. Glad I could brighten your day, though.

Also as a handloader how will this scope work with non-factory ammo? What type of adjustments will be needed while working up a pet load?

If you know your velocity and BC, it should just be a matter of plugging your data into some ballistics software, hopefully one that can give you ranges at a specific MOA/Mil drop. Then play around with your zero until you get something you like. You could also play around with your powder charge to try and match factory ballistics.

How many will be coming in with the first batch? I want to make sure I get one as my new bolt-action .308 is waiting to be shot and I am holding off for this scope to mount on her before I break her in.

If it complicates the BDC, the it's probably not worth it. I can see that. I can certainly say that there is NO point in MOA turrets on a Mil reticle. ARGH...you are going to make me go out and learn Mils, aren't you? $#%$! How exactly does it "run into the BDC"? Do the lines end up overlapping or something?

As for Nikon being combat scopes? Hardly. It was just an example of ballistics software that can give you actual BDC on their reticle for a given weight/BC/Height over Bore/etc... I personally don't mind a Nikon for a .22, but they don't do anything in a FFP, and that's a deal breaker in a variable power scope for me. Glad I could brighten your day, though.

What nikon does with their bdc software is standard in the mil system here is a quick example using mils. The problem with their system is you cant range estimate the way you can using mils.

And obviously the ACSS system is a huge advantage because its auto ranging and BDC at the same time not requiring turret adjustments or math to be done.

Narcissism is the belief in nothing masquerading as tolerance of everything...Ayn Randwww.2AFight.com

So its an example of how the Mil system works. You can also use the horizontal for wind and leads. The ACSS has all the same data but laser edged in the reticle with Auto Range,BDC,Wind, and ranging leads in one. I spend a long long time thinking and problem solving to create this reticle. The ACSS HUD is the most advanced DMR reticle. We tested and test all kinds of designs this is the best of the best.

So its an example of how the Mil system works. You can also use the horizontal for wind and leads. The ACSS has all the same data but laser edged in the reticle with Auto Range,BDC,Wind, and ranging leads in one. I spend a long long time thinking and problem solving to create this reticle. The ACSS HUD is the most advanced DMR reticle. We tested and test all kinds of designs this is the best of the best.

Dimitri

Waiting for this to come out soon. Will be picking it up will call at the warehouse/showroom.